Carter v. Douma

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his drug distribution conviction on ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to police officer’s testimony regarding alleged conversation he had with informant, who, according to officer, identified defendant as someone involved in distributing controlled substances. While Ct. rejected govt. argument that such testimony was permissible as “course of investigation” evidence that explained police conduct leading up to defendant’s arrest, where, as here, govt. had actually used said testimony in substantive manner that violated hearsay rule, any failure to object to said testimony was harmless, where govt. presented other eyewitness testimony to establish that defendant possessed at least 5 grams of cocaine, as well as 12 “bag corners,” which demonstrated defendant’s intent to distribute said cocaine.